Trial by Jury: Free Choice of the Accused

Abstract

The paper explores the problem of out-of-procedure influence on the accused when he is making a decision if it is necessary to consider his case in court with the participation of jurors. The author considers various points of view of practicing lawyers, the results of judicial statistical data and makes the following conclusions. Since the procedure for considering a criminal case with the participation of jurors in terms of complexity, costs of both organizational and material nature far exceeds the ordinary procedure of legal proceedings, there has formed a vicious practice of illegal restriction of the freedom of choice of the accused. Thus, the accused is warned that in case of choosing a trial with the participation of jurors he will get the maximum possible punishment if they render a guilty verdict. As a result, the accused either does not file a petition for consideration of his case with the participation of jurors at all, or refuses an already filed petition. Thus, it is necessary to consolidate the guarantees of the accused’s free choice of this form of legal proceedings at the regulatory level. It is necessary to develop a mechanism that excludes the possibility of out-of-procedure influence if the accused wishes to involve representatives of the citizens in the consideration of his case. To solve this problem, the author proposes the following model. At the request of the defendant, representatives of the citizens should be involved in resolving the issue of sentencing him. In the event of a guilty verdict, two randomly selected jurors, together with the presiding judge, decide all the issues necessary for sentencing. The proves that with this approach, illegal influence on the accused loses all meaning, since all participants in the process will be aware of his right to involve his fellow citizens in the sentencing procedure, his individualization.